Who should/could be a Bond actor?

14104114134154161235

Comments

  • Posts: 15,229
    Getafix wrote: »
    I know. Clive Owen is so down beat. Would have made Craig Bond seem like a barrel of laughs. May be McGregor would have been alright.

    He was rubbish as Obi Wan Kenobi. I think McGregor is better playing non iconic characters.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I know. Clive Owen is so down beat. Would have made Craig Bond seem like a barrel of laughs. May be McGregor would have been alright.

    He was rubbish as Obi Wan Kenobi. I think McGregor is better playing non iconic characters.
    Brosnan outshone him in The Ghost (aka Ghost Writer). I've never seen Bond in him, although he can be a memorable actor (he was great in Angels and Demons).

    I'm not really a fan of his Obi Wan either, but next to that loser Christensen he was practically award winning material imho.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Definitely no to McGregor.

    He can be memorable, perhaps. But, he's no more Bond material than Ben Whishaw is.
  • Posts: 15,229
    bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    I know. Clive Owen is so down beat. Would have made Craig Bond seem like a barrel of laughs. May be McGregor would have been alright.

    He was rubbish as Obi Wan Kenobi. I think McGregor is better playing non iconic characters.
    Brosnan outshone him in The Ghost (aka Ghost Writer). I've never seen Bond in him, although he can be a memorable actor (he was great in Angels and Demons).

    I'm not really a fan of his Obi Wan either, but next to that loser Christensen he was practically award winning material imho.

    That's hardly something to be proud about : being better than an unexperienced actor who had an even more iconic role and whose expectations were even higher.

    I'm a bit sad to learn that James Purefoy blew it at the audition, according to his own words. I wanted him to succeed Brosnan and thought he had a fair chance.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 1,661
    A comment posted on that link:
    "The idea of Gerard Butler being concerned about playing Bond hurting his ability to choose other roles is absolutely hilarious when you consider all the garbage that dude actually does make."

    thumb_1493758872_SNIGGER.jpg
  • Posts: 19,339
    Looking at all the comments at the bottom of the article,it seems Stevens,Cavill and Elba are the most popular ones there.
  • Posts: 15,229
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Looking at all the comments at the bottom of the article,it seems Stevens,Cavill and Elba are the most popular ones there.

    Colour and age aside (and the latter is now a huge argument against him), I don't understand Idris Elba's appeal: his last two movies were duds. At best. Maybe that's why he keeps on teasing his fanbase: if it wasn't for that rumor he'd be considered box office poison at this point.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Looking at all the comments at the bottom of the article,it seems Stevens,Cavill and Elba are the most popular ones there.

    Colour and age aside (and the latter is now a huge argument against him), I don't understand Idris Elba's appeal: his last two movies were duds. At best. Maybe that's why he keeps on teasing his fanbase: if it wasn't for that rumor he'd be considered box office poison at this point.

    I agree...at least with Stevens and Cavill you can see the appeal they may have .
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Stevens would make a good Harry Palmer.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's been a long time since I've seen Troy, but didn't Bana speak with a supposed English accent there?
    I only saw that once and so can't recall.

    Here is the trailer for Closed Circuit. He has an accent here. Like I said, I do like this guy's look.


    Getafix wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    You're probably right about Hemsworth, although he's not the worst suggestion I've heard chucked around.
    I've grown to like him. He was terrific in the superb Thor Ragnarok, but the film was set up to play to his comedic strengths, which he first showcased in Rush. Even in IW, he seemed out of his depth to me, until he started playing it lighter.

    I just can't see Broccoli favouring an actor who only comes alive during the jovial moments. She will go for a guy who can hit the dramatic elements first. She's pretty much said it recently. First criteria - good actor.

    If they wanted to go for a more light hearted Bond (seems unlikely), they could do a lot worse than Hemsworth. He'd milk every ounce of humour out of any script, no matter how weak. Give him a genuinely witty screenplay, as Marvel seem to be able to deliver with pretty much every film, and he'd hit that aspect of Bond out of the park.
    I agree.

    I must watch this. I wonder if he ever actually auditioned, or was contacted about Casino Royale.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
    It's a good point. A director with vision can certainly bring something heretofore missing out of an actor. I wouldn't dismiss Cavill at this point, although he's probably just a tad too well known.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    bondjames wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
    It's a good point. A director with vision can certainly bring something heretofore missing out of an actor. I wouldn't dismiss Cavill at this point, although he's probably just a tad too well known.

    Perhaps.

    I just can't think of a better alternative.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,252
    bondjames wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
    It's a good point. A director with vision can certainly bring something heretofore missing out of an actor. I wouldn't dismiss Cavill at this point, although he's probably just a tad too well known.

    True, for me, his stock has recently dropped , I wasn’t impressed with what he did in MI:F, I wouldn’t completely dismiss him.
    Rigorous screentest are required for anyone who is seen as a serious contender.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
    It's a good point. A director with vision can certainly bring something heretofore missing out of an actor. I wouldn't dismiss Cavill at this point, although he's probably just a tad too well known.

    True, for me, his stock has recently dropped , I wasn’t impressed with what he did in MI:F, I wouldn’t completely dismiss him.
    Rigorous screentest are required for anyone who is seen as a serious contender.
    Agreed, and I hope they do that for the next guy. The James Brolin screentest always cracks me up. Bloody awful and I can't believe he was ever under consideration.

    I came across this interesting article which makes a case for a one shot film with Elba.

    https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2456002/the-case-for-an-idris-elba-james-bond-movie
  • Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
    It's a good point. A director with vision can certainly bring something heretofore missing out of an actor. I wouldn't dismiss Cavill at this point, although he's probably just a tad too well known.

    True, for me, his stock has recently dropped , I wasn’t impressed with what he did in MI:F, I wouldn’t completely dismiss him.
    Rigorous screentest are required for anyone who is seen as a serious contender.
    Agreed, and I hope they do that for the next guy. The James Brolin screentest always cracks me up. Bloody awful and I can't believe he was ever under consideration.

    I came across this interesting article which makes a case for a one shot film with Elba.

    https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2456002/the-case-for-an-idris-elba-james-bond-movie

    That would throw the series into even more confusion than it is now !!
  • Posts: 15,229
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Looking at all the comments at the bottom of the article,it seems Stevens,Cavill and Elba are the most popular ones there.

    Colour and age aside (and the latter is now a huge argument against him), I don't understand Idris Elba's appeal: his last two movies were duds. At best. Maybe that's why he keeps on teasing his fanbase: if it wasn't for that rumor he'd be considered box office poison at this point.

    I agree...at least with Stevens and Cavill you can see the appeal they may have .

    I'm no fan of either but yes. Elba hasn't really been a great success on the big screen so far.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2018 Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
    It's a good point. A director with vision can certainly bring something heretofore missing out of an actor. I wouldn't dismiss Cavill at this point, although he's probably just a tad too well known.

    True, for me, his stock has recently dropped , I wasn’t impressed with what he did in MI:F, I wouldn’t completely dismiss him.
    Rigorous screentest are required for anyone who is seen as a serious contender.
    Agreed, and I hope they do that for the next guy. The James Brolin screentest always cracks me up. Bloody awful and I can't believe he was ever under consideration.

    I came across this interesting article which makes a case for a one shot film with Elba.

    https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2456002/the-case-for-an-idris-elba-james-bond-movie

    That would throw the series into even more confusion than it is now !!
    True. A fanciful idea, but passionately argued at least.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Looking at all the comments at the bottom of the article,it seems Stevens,Cavill and Elba are the most popular ones there.

    Colour and age aside (and the latter is now a huge argument against him), I don't understand Idris Elba's appeal: his last two movies were duds. At best. Maybe that's why he keeps on teasing his fanbase: if it wasn't for that rumor he'd be considered box office poison at this point.

    I agree...at least with Stevens and Cavill you can see the appeal they may have .

    I'm no fan of either but yes. Elba hasn't really been a great success on the big screen so far.
    In fairness, neither has Craig outside of Bond, despite having the fame associated with playing the most known spy of all for over a decade.
  • Posts: 15,229
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
    It's a good point. A director with vision can certainly bring something heretofore missing out of an actor. I wouldn't dismiss Cavill at this point, although he's probably just a tad too well known.

    True, for me, his stock has recently dropped , I wasn’t impressed with what he did in MI:F, I wouldn’t completely dismiss him.
    Rigorous screentest are required for anyone who is seen as a serious contender.
    Agreed, and I hope they do that for the next guy. The James Brolin screentest always cracks me up. Bloody awful and I can't believe he was ever under consideration.

    I came across this interesting article which makes a case for a one shot film with Elba.

    https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2456002/the-case-for-an-idris-elba-james-bond-movie

    That would throw the series into even more confusion than it is now !!
    True. A fanciful idea, but passionately argued at least.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Looking at all the comments at the bottom of the article,it seems Stevens,Cavill and Elba are the most popular ones there.

    Colour and age aside (and the latter is now a huge argument against him), I don't understand Idris Elba's appeal: his last two movies were duds. At best. Maybe that's why he keeps on teasing his fanbase: if it wasn't for that rumor he'd be considered box office poison at this point.

    I agree...at least with Stevens and Cavill you can see the appeal they may have .

    I'm no fan of either but yes. Elba hasn't really been a great success on the big screen so far.
    In fairness, neither has Craig outside of Bond, despite having the fame associated with playing the most known spy of all for over a decade.

    But did Craig had movies that bombed like Elba’s before he was cast as Bond?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.
    It's a good point. A director with vision can certainly bring something heretofore missing out of an actor. I wouldn't dismiss Cavill at this point, although he's probably just a tad too well known.

    True, for me, his stock has recently dropped , I wasn’t impressed with what he did in MI:F, I wouldn’t completely dismiss him.
    Rigorous screentest are required for anyone who is seen as a serious contender.
    Agreed, and I hope they do that for the next guy. The James Brolin screentest always cracks me up. Bloody awful and I can't believe he was ever under consideration.

    I came across this interesting article which makes a case for a one shot film with Elba.

    https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2456002/the-case-for-an-idris-elba-james-bond-movie

    That would throw the series into even more confusion than it is now !!
    True. A fanciful idea, but passionately argued at least.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Looking at all the comments at the bottom of the article,it seems Stevens,Cavill and Elba are the most popular ones there.

    Colour and age aside (and the latter is now a huge argument against him), I don't understand Idris Elba's appeal: his last two movies were duds. At best. Maybe that's why he keeps on teasing his fanbase: if it wasn't for that rumor he'd be considered box office poison at this point.

    I agree...at least with Stevens and Cavill you can see the appeal they may have .

    I'm no fan of either but yes. Elba hasn't really been a great success on the big screen so far.
    In fairness, neither has Craig outside of Bond, despite having the fame associated with playing the most known spy of all for over a decade.

    But did Craig had movies that bombed like Elba’s before he was cast as Bond?
    I'm not sure. He has had what are seen as industry failures since being cast as Bond though, which is perhaps more disappointing. Bond confers a lot of visibility to an actor.

    I haven't seen that Dark Tower film, but I don't think we can lay the blame for its failure on Elba. That film looked like a POS from the trailers. Even McConaughey couldn't save it.
  • Posts: 15,229
    I don't think the quality of the movie or Elba's responsibility has anything to do with it: if he's associated with a bomb that was supposed to be a huge hit, it looks bad regardless. Brosnan was not exactly associated with great movies when he was cast, but he'd had a few big ish roles in successful ones. Craig's pre Bond career was also overall more consistent. I think Elba is a great actor, but hasn't received good material to work on the big screen. In fact they seem to try to sell him as this big star, while most if not all of his successes were on TV and are already quite old.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Roadphill wrote: »
    If I had to choose one from that list for now it would still be Cavill. I just think a decent script and director would be able to coach some swagger into him.

    Not that I am comparing him with Connery, but let's not forget, Terence Young basically moulded Connery into Bond material.

    Difference is, Connery was already a good and more than capable actor who never "acted" on screen.
  • Posts: 15,229
    Yes Connery was a natural.
  • Posts: 17,819
    Stevens would make a good Harry Palmer.

    That's not a bad suggestion, actually. Wonder what could be done with a Harry Palmer film in 2018 – either in a present day set story, or a 60's set one.

    Going through that list, and the names too old to play the part now, it could have been interesting to watch a screen test with James Purefoy, Eric Bana, Christian Bale and Goran Višnjić.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Yes Connery was a natural.

    he's terrible in Marnie though.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Yes Connery was a natural.

    he's terrible in Marnie though.
    Why do you say that? I thought he was perfectly fine, although he was a bit of an a'h#le. If you've not seen Woman of Straw, I highly recommend it. Best Connery non-Bond performance imho (also directed by Basil Dearden, who got the best out of Moore for The Man Who Haunted Himself).
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 1,661
    Chris Hemsworth hasn't had any big hits outside of the Thor franchise. Henry Cavill hasn't had a box office hit outside of Superman. Fallout is Cruise's thing. This is why I don't buy into the 'known actor will be next Bond' belief. I don't think it will matter if the next guy is a complete or relative unknown. From my understanding B Broccoli is the boss. If she chooses whoever, the studio go with it. Sam Mendes confirmed she makes the final decision which means an unknown (not known by the media, most film goers etc) is not a complete impossibility.




  • SuperintendentSuperintendent A separate pool. For sharks, no less.
    Posts: 871
    Since many of us agree Michael Fassbender is/was perfect for the role, I'm wondering why wasn't he considered in 2005. Or was he? At the age of 29, he was perfect for a rookie 00 agent.

    d0ae219c9ccd6fece396e66df086c19b.jpg
  • Posts: 17,819
    Since many of us agree Michael Fassbender is/was perfect for the role, I'm wondering why wasn't he considered in 2005. Or was he? At the age of 29, he was perfect for a rookie 00 agent.

    d0ae219c9ccd6fece396e66df086c19b.jpg

    Could it be that he was too under the radar still back then? 300 came the following year if I'm not mistaken. By the look in that photo, Fassbender would have looked mature enough for the role already at that age. Makes you wonder how many films he could have done - and yet to possibly star in, had he been cast.

    One of the biggest missed opportunities for sure. In my opinion, he would probably have been a better fit than Craig's been, in that I feel Fassbender could have acted the "darker" parts as well as Craig, and the more lighthearted parts better.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Fassbender will go down of one of the best examples of what if?

    His stock is far too high and he's too old but if he'd been cast around Inglourious he would have been just right, that is where I saw his potential.

    Unfortunately for him another actor was doing rather well in the role at that point.
Sign In or Register to comment.